Hurricanes scary under any name

Published: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 at 11:50 AM.

Hazel, Hugo, Fran and Floyd — those are names folks in North Carolina have heard before — and usually not in relation to long-forgotten aunts, uncles or cousins. No, those names are associated with particularly damaging hurricanes that have impacted our state over the years.

There are, of course, a litany of others — from Agnes and Bertha to Ivan and Isabel — that have troubled the state in varying degrees, too. The storms have flooded mountain counties, altered the geography of state beaches, ransacked forests costing millions of dollars — and far too frequently taking lives without remorse.

In other parts of the country, the names change — think Katrina, Camille and Sandy — but the potential for disaster does not. Hurricanes are dangerous events that have to be taken seriously, no matter what or where.

So research released this week to coincide with the start of the 2014 Atlantic Hurricane Season, which ends in November, raised an eyebrow. A study, which notably did not involve any experts in meteorology or disaster science, declared that hurricanes with feminine names are historically deadlier than storms saddled with male names. Researchers posed the odd theory that it’s because people underestimate the potential danger of storms that have female names and are less likely to evacuate or take other necessary precautions.

Sounds like a lot of hooey if you ask us.

Those who live in hurricane-prone regions know, for example, that tropical systems aren’t named based on strength but by a pre-determined list selected in alphabetical order. And besides, the National Hurricane Center didn’t even begin using male names until 1979. Only female names were chosen from 1953 to that point. So any research involving earlier years would be wildly skewed.

Granted, since 1979, female storms have been statistically deadlier. But it would probably be fair to remove Sandy from the equation since it was no longer a hurricane when it made landfall in the northeast. But it’s also fair to note that the amount of damages between male- and female-named storms is about the same.

Hazel, Hugo, Fran and Floyd — those are names folks in North Carolina have heard before — and usually not in relation to long-forgotten aunts, uncles or cousins. No, those names are associated with particularly damaging hurricanes that have impacted our state over the years.

There are, of course, a litany of others — from Agnes and Bertha to Ivan and Isabel — that have troubled the state in varying degrees, too. The storms have flooded mountain counties, altered the geography of state beaches, ransacked forests costing millions of dollars — and far too frequently taking lives without remorse.

In other parts of the country, the names change — think Katrina, Camille and Sandy — but the potential for disaster does not. Hurricanes are dangerous events that have to be taken seriously, no matter what or where.

So research released this week to coincide with the start of the 2014 Atlantic Hurricane Season, which ends in November, raised an eyebrow. A study, which notably did not involve any experts in meteorology or disaster science, declared that hurricanes with feminine names are historically deadlier than storms saddled with male names. Researchers posed the odd theory that it’s because people underestimate the potential danger of storms that have female names and are less likely to evacuate or take other necessary precautions.

Sounds like a lot of hooey if you ask us.

Those who live in hurricane-prone regions know, for example, that tropical systems aren’t named based on strength but by a pre-determined list selected in alphabetical order. And besides, the National Hurricane Center didn’t even begin using male names until 1979. Only female names were chosen from 1953 to that point. So any research involving earlier years would be wildly skewed.

Granted, since 1979, female storms have been statistically deadlier. But it would probably be fair to remove Sandy from the equation since it was no longer a hurricane when it made landfall in the northeast. But it’s also fair to note that the amount of damages between male- and female-named storms is about the same.

We tend to agree with Susan Cutter, director of the University of South Carolina’s Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute, who told the Associated Press that she doubted the notion that female-named storms are deadlier. There’s some coincidence involved.